I'm not sure of the byelaws on this particular route, but riding a bicycle on a footpath isn't normally illegal, and in this case it doesn't look like they're causing any damage or any user conflict either. Well done on the detective work though, have a pat on the head.
I don't think it sets a very good example basically and as I know the area it jumped out at me as being a cheeky trail. Currently there are negotiations going on about the Management of the Moorlands and a lot of trail use is being considered ATM (whetehr that be MXers, bikes, runner, wlakers, birders 4x4s) - although this area is not part of the consultancy, talk of different users behaviours are being discussed at these meetings.
I don't hink this doe much to further our cause as responsible users. For a magazine and one of its journo's to be photographed doing this undermines our position as responsible trail users.
It's buried at the bottom of a bike test article, with no location given.
Publishing a picture of them riding a cheeky trail doesn't make them hypocrites. Recent articles on the site have acknowledged that cheeky riding takes place but asked people to be responsible in how they do it.
In my experience, the real damage is caused by persistent everyday use, obvious building work, or event organisers who don't do their homework and end up drawing attention to inappropriate bits of trail.
pieface, fair point and I may be a hypocrite here in a way, but to me riding a footpath is one thing, building jumps etc across / on it is another. Leave it as you found it and risk no-ones safety and cheekies are ok imo.
I ride footpaths with due consideration (careful about how and when, with who etc) as well as with a bit of contempt for our access laws in the UK. Remember how ramblers got any access at all in the first place.. and that issue's been intelligently discussed on STW already.
Now if they were building and riding a 3ft high booter across that trail I'd be the first to say "good skills.. but - oi! No!" )
We have to get back to the origanal post which quotes exsisting trails, footpaths, we have the exact same problem in our local forestry commision woods, in the last 15 years or so we have built up a network of natural trails using undulations that already exsist and just clearing leaves and dead wood and have a fantastic trail network that is low impact and the forest wardens turn a blind eye too and when the leaves fall these are covered and unless you are local you would never find them.
However in the last few years we have seen increasing digging of jumps and berms on some of the more known of these trails and the forestry do not like it and have becomes far less freindly to our cheeky trail building and it impacts on us all and in the end we will all lose our trails.
If you own the land build what the hell you like but when useing public land shared with horses and walkers and sneeky trails on private land keep the signs of a trail to a minimum and we will keep the use of our trails well into the future.
[i]One could argue that journo's should be advocates of our sport and promote good practise, whereas these photo's published on what is quoted as being the busiest bike forum would suggest that they encourage the use of illegal trail riding. Perhaps the worst case of MTBers being our own worst enemies? [/i]
What's bad practice about riding an empty trail mid week?
Have you read any of the access articles in the mag or on the site?
http://singletrackmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/online-feature-access-all-areas/
http://singletrackmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/access-all-areas-the-campaign-starts-here/
Original article has been discussed (fairly positively I've heard) at a few Local Access Forums now, why not take it along to your local one..
http://www.northyorkmoors.org.uk/uploads/publication/11350.pdf
Pinpointing cheeky trails on maps is far worse practice than riding them. Bravo.
I agree with [b]littlemisspanda[/b] when it comes to "[b]kids'n'jumps[/b]"
Also, encouraging kids to think that the "countryside" is somewhere they can have fun, and not just somewhere for middle aged folk* to enjoy the view, is a good thing. Built jumps on open trails do erk me I must admit, but then, that's more because that's not really my riding, rather than thinking the kids should only build their jumps on inner city wasteland. So, yes, building trails on footpaths does annoy me, but I think that I'm probably wrong to feel that way.
[i]
*why you looking at me?![/i]
Kelvin, I totally agree. But if the kids (grown up or not!) then loose access or get more grief off the 'oldies' when they go there due to the stuff they build, it's a downward spiral that discourages them from messing about in the woods as they should be able to. It's not about other riders being annoyed or not, maybe about how as a group we might encourage more sustainable messing about in the woods?
I haven't heard back from IMBA yet but in the meantime, I wonder how many local access groups there are with riders involved, also if the access groups prefer people not to be affiliated with membership bodies maybe there could be a forum for them to discuss and share experiences, direct focus etc?
(I am volunteering time on this, just unsure how to use it yet)
[i]I haven't heard back from IMBA yet but in the meantime, I wonder how many local access groups there are with riders involved[/i]
IMBA probably don't have the resources or structure to support an access network from what I've heard. I'm aiming to chat to CTC next week about their role and aspirations.
jameso, kids ARE being pushed out of playing in the woods. I'm thinking of, for example, the amazing stuff that was build in West Woods in Herefordshire, and is now closed off. Building in the woods doesn't free kids from the control of their (richer) elders. Anyway, as I said, personally, building on trials annoys me, but then I'm older and don't jump. Agreed it makes access issues harder for "us", but what about "them"? I'm aware enough to realise that my disdain for kids building "where they shouldn't" is probably me being selfish.
Kelvin, I am talking about access for us and them, not dividing us up, my concern is that diggers and builders could lose access and that often includes all riders losing access. If we stop thinking of ourselves as groups and think about wider access threats I start thinking that older riders may be able to help the diggers find places where everyone is happier. Ok it's taken a threat to my own riding to see it this way but looking at us all as one group feels more positive.
Hi Dave, I'd be interested to hear about what they say.
James, kids don't tend to own land, and very few landowners are amenable to them building on their land, so they probably accept that they're not welcome, and just get on and build, not caring if it means access issues for us/them.
Building jumps in your bedroom is quite limiting.
My understanding is it was Yorkshire Water (who own the land?) who took it down and left the debris.
Mark_b
Esholt Woods is Bradford Council woodland, so more likely to be them, It's also quite likely there will be a "Friends of Esholt Woods" who look after the wood. I think it's going to come on the MTB radar soon with Bradford Council, not sure what they want to do tho, but at the moment they seem very positive about all things MTB in the Aire Valley. Certainly they seem reasonably relaxed with what's gone on there of late. It's possible that SingletrAction might get involved, as they are currently involved in another council project in the AireValley.
Kelvin, I know that, that's why I'm saying maybe we could do more, in everyone's interest. Guidance and building a louder voice with a direction to add to theirs perhaps, more of us spending more time on access than on here, that kind of thing.
Anyway, if anyone who is involved wants to pm me i'd be keen to hear from them, or mail me your details if you're interested in anything I can find out. Correctiveroger and others did a great job at cranham and it made both the issue and the results of actions taken more real when its that close to home.
think it's going to come on the MTB radar soon with Bradford Council,
A statement like that usually strikes fear into any rider that favours natural tracks that have developed over time (the recent building notwithstanding) 🙂 I trust SingletrActions involvement will ensure some semblance of quality control is maintained.
I think we agree James. I'm just trying to see it from the "builders" point of view, rather than just my own.
Kelvin, we certainly do then. Sorry I thought you were pointing out the too-obvious )
We're all in it together whether we like it or not, is how I'm seeing it now. Local jump / DH spots in manageable places and info about why they're needed (to users and others) is a good thing for all riders, even if we don't use them.
Wunundred!
On a related note, I haven't seen anyone ranting about walkers heading up what can only be a mountain bike track. I've usually gotten the 'I thought it was a badger run' after the standard 'Watch where you're going! You could have killed me/my dog/any other walkers!' At what point do we, as a collective of cyclists stop saying 'everyone should just get along and be considerate' and start saying 'get off my singletrack you inconsiderate dog walking fool!'?
Dave, who have you spoke to at IMBA? Please feel free to cant act me: Gareth.newns@imba.org.uk
We are the only organisation solely representing mountain bikers in the UK.
Hi,
I'm part of Friends of Baildon Moor and we do have these conflicts, notably a year or two ago when a very few people on the Moor who were "enhancing" some of the natural runs by digging in the ancient bell pits. This damage to the archaeology caused a lot of concern bad
PR, with the police notified. I got flak for it too, but it was indefensible.
We did some work with the council who have formally agreed that biking IS permitted on the Moor, PROVIDED certain guidelines in the Information for Users are observed: http://baildonmoor.org
The deal is basically we can ride the many existing tracks on the moor but can not dig or use tools on them. Care and consideration for all others and the land is expected. This might not suit every rider but the Moor is more good varied XC than AM/DH anyway. It is a shared public space.
The pay back is that MTBs are now formally permitted on the Moor and that digging jumps & berms within the Quarry itself IS OK.
I'm involved with the council & the local access forum too; persistence is all-important.
everybody riding a bike is having a healthy happy good nice time till they fall off I suppose. **** off with negativity of cycling. you are wrong. ANY cycling is fantastic an theraputic and brilliant and gets you to see stuff and lots of things whilst using your body... Differentiating between types of cycling is stupid (I'll think of a really good metaphor in a bit...) because it's all good. Don't make a deal of it, ride your bike somewhere.
Am I a hypocrite? I give a big fat zero to any kind of building, but support a 'gentle' move onto footpaths and other ROWs i.e if we play nice we might have more places to ride.
Just a couple of things regards building. As trekster pointed out, a local had to be air lifted out of Woburn with back injuries after coming off on a drop that had just been dug into a descent that locals had been riding for years.
And in the same area a climb known as 'impossible climb' had a series of drops dug into it, rendering a well know climb useless and truly impossible!
Another issue, bikes. I look at the bikes available and think where the **** are you going to ride that? Obviously that doesn't apply to riders in proper mountainous areas. But pretty soon you're going to get bored riding your six inch travel full susser around the hills of Beds, Bucks and Herts. Reminds me of when sports shops sold air rifles, if you lived in London and bought one you soon get yourself into trouble!
I have to agree that the "obvious" building does tend to attract the wrong attention but "kids will be kids" and it won't be stopped. It may scale back if freeride & DH drop in popularity although I expect the many vested intrests will keep it high profile.
On the cycling community side of things my experiences of other cyclists (including the full-face, bright clothed youngsters pushing their 8" travel heavyweights up Leckhampton Hill) have been nearly all positive. Even horse riders and walkers have generally been friendly and positive - as was stated earlier, it's amazing what a little courtesy and a cheery "hello" can do!
Don't think the building can be stopped but our image as MTBers can certainly be enhanced with some courtesy and mutual respect
I met a couple of chaps a few years ago who had been working all day
to protect an ancient longbarrow in Standish woods.
It was being eroded by bikes using it as the starting point for two trails. The guys had done a lot of work repairing the erosion with gravel, coving the thing in bramble and even sticking big logs either end to discourage people from riding on it.
What was missing was a sign to say what was being done and why.
Within a week all their work was undone.